India Elections 2009 Results – Live Blogging

With the votes set to be counted for the 2009 Lok Sabha elections, here is what Offstumped is looking forward to today.

#1 Will the BJP overtake the Congress as the single largest party and if so by what margin ?

#2 Will Andhra turn in a hung assembly and if so how will the power equations be re-writtent by the voters. Specifically can the TDP manage the numbers with TRS and others or does the Congress have an outside chance by roping in Chiranjeevi’s PRP ?

#3 Will Orissa turn out a hung assembly. Specifically can Naveen Patnaik’s BJD manage the numbers with others or will he be compelled to a suicidal embrace of the Congress. Will Orissa become the next Karnataka for the BJP ?

#4 Will Maharashtra continue to deliver a split verdict or has the BJP-Shiv Sena combine turned the corner in this key large state ?

#5 Will Tamil Nadu’s unusually high turnout mean a AIADMK sweep or will it be a split verdict for Tamil Nadu’s revolving door politics ?

Specific bellwhether seats of interest are

#1 Mandi in Himachal Pradesh which has voted for the party that has formed the government last 6 elections. A BJP loss here would be ominous

#2 Will Dumka in Jharkhand vote against JMM/Congress/RJD

#3 Will Mayurbhanj in Orissa vote against BJP ?

#4 Will Nandyal in Andhra vote against Congress ?

#5 Will Mahabubnagar in Andhra surprise the TRS by dumping KCR ?

#6 Will Peddapalle in Andhra vote against the Congress ?

#7 Will the BJP sweep Rajmahal, Godda, Jamshedpur and Giridih in Jharkhand ?

#8 Which of these 3 Gujarat bellwhether seats will BJP wrest or retain – Anand, Bulsar, Banaskantha ?

#9 Which way will Kangra in Himachal Pradesh go ?

#10 What about bellwhether seats in Chattisgarh (Mahasamund), Maharashtra (Ahmednagar), Punjab (Jalandher), Rajasthan (Sikar), West Bengal (Dum-dum)

#11 How many of the bellwhether seats in Orissa of Aska, Phulbani, Bolangir, Sambalpur, Deogarh, Sundargarh will go to BJP ?

#12 Finally will any of the 4 bellwhether seats of Tamil Nadu Vellore, Chidambaram, Coimbatore, Nagappatnam fall to the AIADMK lead alliance ?

Also catch all the action via Offstumped on

- Twitter

- Live analysis and debate on this Internet Panel

PS: As this goes to press, a short email exchange with reliable quarters in the BJP reveals fairly high confidence, fingers crossed.

Filed under: CNN-IBN Boycott, Chattisgarh Polls 2008, Chhattisgarh Polls 2008, Delhi Polls 2008, DesiPundit, Dharma-debates, Dharmayudh-2009, Gujarat Polls 2007, India Elections 2009, India Lok Sabha Elections 2009, Karnataka Polls 2008, Lok Sabha Polls 2008-2009, Madhya Pradesh Polls 2008, Madhya Pradesh Polls 2008, Manmohan Confidence Vote, Offstumped, Offstumped on Twitter, Pratibha Patil, Rajasthan Polls 2008, War on Terror, betrayal of aam admi, jeetega-bharat

Morality of Elections

With another 24 hours to go before we learn the mind of the Indian voter, we are once agained regaled with endless speculation on how the Congress has many paths to power and how the BJP has few options.

Looking beyond the many possible deals that can be struck between the ADMK, BSP, SP, TDP, BJD and the rest of the alphabet soup, it is important to not lose sight of the morality of this election.

In 2005 the voters of Bihar expressed their disgust at the 15 year corrup rule of the Lalu Yadav lead RJD with the support of the Congress. In a blatant repudiation of the voter’s sentiment the Ram Vilas Paswan’s LJP attempted to drive a hard bargain with the RJD with the Congress appointed Governor Buta Singh lending a helping hand.

The LJP, Congress and the RJD had to eventually pay a high price for violating the morality of the Feb 2005 election with the BJP-JD(U) under Nitish Kumar sweeping the October 2005 election.

In 2004 Karnataka voted to punish the S.M. Krishna lead Congress government by favoring the BJP as the single largest party. In a blatant repudiation of the sentiment of the Karnataka voter, the Congress made common cause with the JD-S to form a government by seeking moral sanction under a dubious secularism. Two years later the JD-S parted ways with the Congress to form a government with the BJP before betraying within 12 months.

With its morality violated twice Karnataka voted the BJP to power in 2008 with vengeance that saw both the Congress and to a larger degree JD-S pay a heavy price for their myopic opportunism.

Jharkhand, Goa and Assam have had their morality violated over the last 3 years despite voting to punish non-performing governments.

With all the exit polls pointing to a NDA sweep in Jharkhand it is but a matter of time before the myopic opportunism that gets passed of as “upholding secularism” is repudiated once again by an angry electorate that will brook no more  violations of the morality of their electoral preferences.

With 24 hours to go we are once again witnessing this myopic opportunism practised by the Congress, Communists and others of its ilk rearing its head under the guise of keeping out the BJP at all costs.

This myopic opportunism is being actively fanned by a complicit Delhi based media which continues to conduct itself in a moral vaccum.

So morally bankrupt are these media spinmeisters that they see no immorality in suggesting that an AIADMK even if it sweeps Tamil Nadu on anti-UPA plank should embrace the Congress just because it suits their political bias.

Let us set aside the realpolitik for a moment to reflect on what this means. Tamil Nadu has had its all time high turnout in a Lok Sabha elections. Tamil voters across the state have showed up to vote incensed over what they percieve as a betrayal of Tamil interests by the DMK and the Congress.

By suggesting that the AIADMK, if it indeed it were to be the beneficiary of this punishment by the voters, should just embrace the party against who the Tamil voter in all likelihood has expressed anger and disgust, the media stands guity of the same violations of the morality of elections that we had witnessed in Bihar, Karnataka, Jharkhand, Goa and Assam.

Not only is this myopic opportunism immoral it is also a slap on the face of Indian Democracy for it negates the very purpose of elections. Why hold elections if parties were to violate the morality of those elections to strike opportunistic alliances that are a complete repudiation of the voter’s sentiment.

Let it be very clear to the Congress Party and the rest of the 3rd front campers that any attempts by them to stitch a coalition premised on negativity would come with a heavy political price.

Unless the Congress emerges as the single largest party in this election it would have lost its moral authority to form the next government.  The Congress must desist from attempting to form a government if the BJP emerges as the single largest party. Any attempts by the Congress to stitch a minority government or to prop up a 3rd party government with the sole purpose of keeping the BJP out even if it emerges as the single largest party would be a rank violation of the morality of the election.

Filed under: Chattisgarh Polls 2008, Delhi Polls 2008, DesiPundit, Dharmayudh-2009, Gujarat Polls 2007, India Elections 2009, Karnataka Polls 2008, Lok Sabha Polls 2008-2009, Madhya Pradesh Polls 2008, Manmohan Confidence Vote, Rajasthan Polls 2008, betrayal of aam admi, jeetega-bharat

Dharma of Investigation

It is hard to tell what is worse – the ghost of Bofors returning in the form of Quattrochi or the ghost of Indira Gandhi returning in Priyanka Gandhi Vadra’s wardrobe ?

Nevertheless they both make a joint appearance in this story in the Telegraph with these incredible remarks attributed to Priyanka Gandhi Vadra.

“Absolutely not. It’s out of question,” she retorted when asked about the BJP’s allegation that the Congress had pressured the CBI

But then the public debate on the CBI’s role has not been any more intelligent either.

It makes one nervous when the Law Minister of the land makes this astounding claim that the CBI doesnt run under the government.

The nerves are frayed even further when one reads remarks like these in what is meant to be objective news analysis in a Business News paper.

The CBI’s image as an independent and autonomous investigative agency…….

All of this gets compounded by further talk of ammending the Constitution to make the CBI more independent and autonomous.

Somewhere we seem to have missed the plot on the role of Government.

If every Executive function that fails our confidence is to be hived off as an autonomous function why bother with electing a Government ?

We seem to have missed that the basic problem with CBI is not one of independence and autonomy but one of a deficit of credibility.

It is the job of the Executive to uphold the rule of law.

This means it is also the job of the Executive to investigate and bring those guilty to trial.

To treat this fundamental Executive function as something that requires Independence and Autonomy is to miss the basic point on the responsibility of the Executive.

It is the responsibility of the Executive to ensure its investigations are credible. It cannot run away from this Dharma by blaming the politics that are the foundation of any democratically elected Executive.

If today questions are being raised of the CBI’s conduct it is not because the people of this country want the CBI to be yet another runaway body of unelected bureaucrats who are a law unto themselves.

Today questions are being raised of the CBI’s conduct because the government stands guilty of not discharging its Executive Dharma in conducting criminal investigations.

The solution to this lies in finding fixes that will force the Government to not violate Dharma in its conduct rather than allow it to abdicate its responsibility by providing it with constitutional exit strategies in the name of autonomy.

We in India suffer a unique situation where the Executive on account of its Legislative majority can abuse its privilege with very little oversight or accountability.

If any Constitutional improvements are desired it would be to first delink the Executive’s survival from the Legislative majority  and to next provide for a constitutional role for the Legislature to maintain oversight of the Executive’s functions.

We dont need the CBI to be independent and autonomous we merely need the CBI to discharge its Constitutional duty or Dharma in an honest and credible manner while the full responsibilty for ensuring it does so rests with the Executive Government which in turn is accountabile to the Parliament. 

If the Executive Government and Parliament are guilty of not discharging their responsibilities, making the CBI independent and autonomous solves nothing it merely passes the buck to a constitutional grey area inviting the Judiciary to intervene in Executive functions rather than limit itself to passing  judgement on Constitutional Issues.

To post comments click here

Filed under: DesiPundit, Dharmayudh-2009, India Elections 2009, Lok Sabha Polls 2008-2009, Manmohan Confidence Vote, betrayal of aam admi, jeetega-bharat

The Foreign Policy Debate that never was

It must be odd to any external observer that an election campaign in a 21st century economic power should be so bereft of any serious debate on foreign policy vision at a time when two of its major neighbors are facing serious existential crises.

It is a miracle that for a democracy surrounded by hostile borders and neighbours in turmoil on almost all four sides, the Indian economic success story trudges along.

But then if we have aspirations of matching a China if not outpacing it, isnt it time to have a serious debate on which national party has the ideas and the acumen to transform these hostile borders ?

Isnt it also time we had a serious debate on which national party has the vision to take us to an era of benign frontiers that boost economic growth rather than be a drag on it with the constant threat of conflict ?

The Manmohan Singh dispensation with its single point focus on the Indo-US Nuclear Deal stands guilty first of antiquated thinking in its first 2 years in office with Natwar Singh as foreign minister and then delinquency with Manmohan Singh not appointing a replacement. By the time Pranab Mukherjee assumed office he was compensating for Manmohan Singh’s lack of political acumen by heading over 50 GoMs and taming an intransigent Left on the Nuclear Deal.

The casualty of this delinquency and lack of focus on Foreign Policy beyond the Nuclear Deal and Af-Pak Fak-Ap, is the diminished Indian Leadership in the sub-continent, the latest being the Sri Lankan crisis.

The BJP’s formulation of Muscular Diplomacy hasnt quite answered the fundamental question this blogger has posed on our hostile borders. Muscular Diplomacy at best can be a tactical option amongst many that could be pursued to achieve an end goal.

The larger question for the BJP’ is what is its strategic vision on the foreign policy front to create a benign conflict-free neighborhood that boosts our economic growth.

Can we have debate on this please, even at this late hour ?

A reproduction of Offstumped post on SAARC from April 2007 follows.

The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) has opened its annual summit in New Delhi. This was the 14th summit since its inception. The two-day SAARC Summit, attended by leaders from eight countries including the latest entrant Afghanistan, agreed to take “every possible measure” to stop financing of terror acts and counter trafficking of narcotics and illicit arms. The eight-page Declaration took note of India’s initiative for a SAARC Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal matters to effectively combat terrorism and organised crime. Terming the Declaration as “comprehensive and forward-looking”, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said it gave SAARC a wider mandate to promote peace and development in the region, including through greater connectivity in trade, movement of people and through the flow of ideas. The document was adopted by the leaders from Afghanistan, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Maldives, Bangladesh and Bhutan.

In a stinging analysis of the SAARC bonhomie, FT’s South Asia bureau chief Jo Johnson called the summit lacklustre and said India still has much to learn from China’s deft economic diplomacy. His argument

While Beijing has sought to create interdependencies with its rivals, in support of its stated ambitions for a “peaceful rise”, New Delhi appears complacent about the fact that it presides over the least economically integrated region in the world

Offstumped takes a hard look at SAARC and the sorry state of affairs in our neighbourhood.

“hughty, foolishly vain, self-conceited and stolid” was how one translation of Al-Beruni’s observations on India puts it. Perceptions of Indiahave come a long way since but not so in our immideate neighbourhood. Jo Johnson puts it glibly – Good fences make good neighbours, but India has taken the saying too literally. What is it about us and our neighbourhood that makes regional co-operation so challenging ?

Offstumped’s hypothesis is that we are an angry neighbourhood and therein lies the challenge.

The net aggregate anger across the countries that make up any neighbourhood should be a good measure of neighbourly bonhomie or lack of.

Let us take the NAFTA region as an example – politics in the U.S. is generally marked by an apathetic and ignorant majority influenced by a highly motivated and angry minority. Given the high opportunity costs of sustaining public anger, the micro-minority’s contribution to the aggregate anger is small if not insignificant. One can see this anger manifest itself in the ongoing Immigration debate and tighter borders but not serious enough to really derail cross border free trade. The region has definitely transformed from the pre-9/11 days of benign borders to the present times of a vigilant Homeland Security and vigilante Minutemen, but economic integration and free trade continues to flourish albeit some hiccups.

Across the pond, the net aggregate anger in the European Union saw itself manifest in strong resistance to EU Constitution vote sometime back and immigrant unfriendly legislations in recent times. Fears of the Polish Plumber and Indian Steelman on the one hand and Muslim Immigrant anger on the other saw hurdles to greater economic integration but was not significant enough to derail or rollback current levels of economic integration.

Coming to our own neighbourhood the net aggregate anger is assuming “cardiac arrest proportions” and a regional meltdown should not be ruled out. Starting with anger across rural Nepal fanned by the Maoists to the anger in the streets of Bangladesh fanned by a mismanaged democracy and irrepresible Islamic demagogues, sub-continental anger has been at a high. With the Lankan crisis escalating with recent air strikes by LTTE and the fluidity in Pakistan on account of anti-Musharraf turmoil, India not only suffers volatile borders but also very angry neighbors dwelling across those borders.

That brings us to the topic at hand on SAARC. With all this anger it is no surprise SAARC continues to be a dysfunctional showpiece of South Asian co-operation. When the Lankan crisis was brewing last August, Offstumped had called for a full time foreign minister in the Manmohan Singh Government to don the mantle of South Asian Leadership. Many months later when in October Manmohan Singh had finally appointed Pranab Mukherjee as the foreign minister Offstumped had pointed out why his appointment was nothing to celebrate.

Offstumped Bottomline: The FT’s Jo Johnson makes an important observation when he contrasts India’s lacklustre foreign policy leadership with deal making China. Manmohan Singh’s foreign policy flourishes have been limited to the yet to materialize Indo-US Nuke Deal and the Havana self-goal in the Joint Terrorism Mechanism with Pakistan. Apart from empty rhetoric of foreign policy independence manifested in the “all talk no action” Iran Pipeline project the UPA Government has failed miserably on the foreign policy front.

South Asia needs an urgent dose of Anger Management, who better than peace loving India to deliver it, if only our Foreign Minister showed more dynamism and leadership.

Filed under: Chattisgarh Polls 2008, Chhattisgarh Polls 2008, Delhi Polls 2008, DesiPundit, Dharmayudh-2009, Gujarat Polls 2007, India Elections 2009, Karnataka Polls 2008, Lok Sabha Polls 2008-2009, Madhya Pradesh Polls 2008, Manmohan Confidence Vote, Rajasthan Polls 2008, War on Mumbai, War on Terror, betrayal of aam admi, jeetega-bharat

India Elections 2009 Phase 1 – Analysis

The first phase of voting for the Lok Sabha has come to an end covering 17 States and union territories in 124 constituencies with 143 million of India’s 714 million voters eligible to exercise their franchise.

IANS had this early report on the voter turnout

In Andhra Pradesh, once a Maoist bastion, there was 60-65 per cent voter turnout, 65 per cent in the three parliamentary constituencies of Assam and 60-70 per cent in Mizoram, Nagaland, Meghalaya and Arunachal Pradesh, also in the northeast. Manipur was lower at 40 to 50 per cent.

In violence-hit Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Bihar, about 50 per cent of the voters turned to cast their franchise.

Long queues were seen outside booths in Kerala with officials estimating that the turnout would be about 60 per cent. It was highest in Ernakulam with 67.5 per cent and surprisingly low in Thiruvananthapuram, where the Congress fielded star debutant, former UN under-secretary general Shashi Tharoor, with 45.4 per cent.

Unlike in recent elections Offstumped is not carrying detailed seat by seat predictions on account of the fact that this is the first national election after delimitation and also on account of the fact that this election will also a large number of first time voters participating.

However an examination of the Lok Sabha seats that went to polls in this phase is useful to determine if any of them are bellwhether seats that have always voted in a manner that is in line with who forms the government at the center.

Regular Offstumped Reader Gaelo Rhinus has done some excellent analysis crunching the numbers across the last six Lok Sabha elections between 1989 when the monopoly of the Congress party on national politics ended to 2004 when the Congress for the first time in its history formed a coalition government.

Over the rest of the election season Offstumped will carry an analysis of these bellwhether seats to see if we can detect any leading indicators on the final outcome.

Of the 124 Lok Sabha seats that went polls today, based on Gaelo Rhinus’ number crunching the following seats can be called bellwhether seats.

#1 Mahasamund in Chattisgarh

#2 Aska in Orissa

#3 Bolangir in Orissa

#4 Sambalpur in Orissa

#5 Sundargarh in Orissa

#6 Mahabubnagar in Andhra

#7 Peddapalle in Andhra

#1 Mahasamund

Mahasamund was a bellwhether seat 5 out of 6 times in the last six elections.

It reliably voted for Janata Dal in 1989 and for the Congress 1991 and 2004. It also voted against the BJP in 1996 and with the BJP in 1998. 

The only year where it voted for a party that neither formed the Government nor had a stake in the government through outside support was in 1999 when it voted for the Congress.

This year early reports suggest 51% voter turnout in Mahasamund. Mr. Advani had a rally in Mahasamund on the last day of campaigning. Rahul Gandhi campaigned in Mahasamund as well on April 11th. Ajit Jogi won from here last time but its an unreserved seat this time with two OBC leaders battling it out. 

The final outcome may well depend on the turnout here which traditionally has been the 60s.  The early estimate of low turnout of 51% does not augur well for the BJP.

#2 Aska

Aska once again has been a bellwhether seat 5 out 6 times. It reliably voted for Janata Dal in 1989 and 1996 when the National Front and United Front governments were formed. It also voted for the Congress in 1991 and for the NDA in 1998 and 1999. The only year it missed voting for a party that was part of the central government was in 2004.

No data yet on turnout in Aska but for some reports of long queues of women lining up to vote.

The BJD has fielded a defector from the CPI in this seat while the Congress has fielded a veteran recluse who only recently returned to active politics. The BJP has fielded a debutant Shanti Devi, wife of a former royal.

Which ever way Aska votes this time, it definitely will not be bellwhether to the BJP’s prospects of forming the government unless Naveen Patnaik returns the NDA fold after the elections.

#3 Bolangir

Bolangir like the rest got it right 5 out of 6 times. It too got it wrong in 2004. But unlike Aska which has been a BJD bastion, Bolangir has been a BJP bastion which makes it interesting for this analysis.

No data yet on voter turnout in Bolangir, its the largest constituency in Orissa in the first phase with 14 lakh voters. The battle is between two former royals marking the BJD-BJP split. Rahul Gandhi has campaigned in Bolangir after staying overnight and giving his security the slip. 

The margin of victory for the BJP has narrowed over the years in this seat. If the BJD cuts into the BJP vote by around 7% this seat is a cliffhanger.

#4 Sambalpur

Sambalpur too go it wrong in 2004 like Aska and Bolangir. With a poor voter turnout in a Maoist infested area, Sambalpur looks like a BJD Congress fight and whichever way it votes will likely be an indicator of a 3rd front or Congress government to come. A possible surprise could be the Hindu vote mobilisation in urban areas of Sambalpur on account of restrictions on a local religious function following onthe impact of Narendra Modi’s campaign rally in Sambalpur.

#5 Sundargarh

Sundargarh like Bolangir became a BJP bastion to get it wrong only in 2004 while being a bellwhether in other 5 elections. It bore the brunt of Maoist violence on a few polling stations today.

The BJP candidate Joel Oram has been in the news over the years for taking on Naveen Patnaik on a host of issues. With resentment brewing on the issue of Mining at Khandadhar (not Kandahar) it would be interesting to see if the BJP can retain this seats. If this report is anything to go by it may just be smooth sailing for the BJP.

#6 Mahabubnagar

Mahabubnagar in Andhra is perhaps the second most reliable indicator of the Congress’ prospects of forming the Government in New Delhi. It has one of the largest BPL population in Andhra and not a very great track record of implementing NREGS.

Whenever Mahabubnagar has voted for the Congress it has either formed the government at the center or like in 1996 had a stake in the government. The lone exception being 1989.

It reported some incidents of violence and damage to EVMs today.

TRS Chief and the chief protagonist for the Telangana cause K. Chandrashekhar Rao, KCR, contesting from here with reports suggesting he has a tough fight.

If Mahabubnagar votes against the Congress this time the likelihood of Manmohan Singh returning as Prime Minister is almost zero.

#7 Peddapalle

Peddapalle like Mahabubnagar should rank as the second most reliable indicator of the likelihood of  a Congress government in the center. Everytime it has voted for the Congress we have had a Congress government  or a government propped up by the Congress but for 1989.  Early reports indicate a very poor voter turnout in Peddapalle.  Congress veteran G. Venkataswamy has given the seat to his son Vivekananda. Despite his exhortations the Congress leadership has been reluctant to endorse the Telangana cause with Rahul Gandhi refusing to bring it up at a recent campaign event.

Remains if Telangana comes back to bite the Congress in Peddapalle. A Congress loss here is a strong indicator of the dimming prospects for Manmohan Singh in New Delhi.

More analysis on bellwhether seats to come in subsequent phases. In the meantime here is an Offstumped teaser on any bellwhether seats that got all 6 elections right between 1989 and 2004.

To post comments click here

Filed under: Chattisgarh Polls 2008, Chhattisgarh Polls 2008, Delhi Polls 2008, DesiPundit, Dharmayudh-2009, Gujarat Polls 2007, India Elections 2009, Karnataka Polls 2008, Lok Sabha Polls 2008-2009, Madhya Pradesh Polls 2008, Manmohan Confidence Vote, Rajasthan Polls 2008, betrayal of aam admi, jeetega-bharat

Open Letter to Dr. Pratap Bhanu Mehta

Eminent Delhi based public intellectual and former member of the National Knowledge Commission Dr. Pratap Bhanu Mehta today wrote a curious op-ed in the Indian Express titled “The Politics of Hurt“.

This open letter is addressed to him with the intention of obtaining some answers.

Dear Dr. Mehta

It was interesting to note that public intellectuals such as yourself can take a political stance in public 48 hours before the nation goes to polls.

But then your political stance reflected in this op-ed in the Indian Express is curious for a couple of reasons.

It is clear that you definitely dont want to vote for the BJP. It is also clear that you definitely do want to vote for the Congress.

But then Sir where you are emphatic in your rejection of the BJP you betray no conviction at all in your endorsement of the Congress. In fact you dont even hazard to say in as many words that you support the Congress despite betraying your sentiments towards it.

Why Sir this intellectual timidity ?

Why Sir do you need to dedicate 95% of your column for the case against the BJP and leave only a few sentences to make a less than convincing case for the Congress ?

Why Sir do you need the BJP excuse to make your case for the Congress ?

In fact less troubling than your critique of the BJP is your curious case for the Congress.

What “idea” exactly Sir are you referring to when you say

They attack the Congress in the name of an idea of what the Congress should be.

Your hopes for the so called “ideal” the Congress represents would have carried far greater credibility and conviction if you had dedicated your column to describing that “ideal”, rather than dedicate the entire column to venting out your disgust towards the BJP and Mr. Advani.

In fact doing so you seem to betray emotions that suggest the exact opposite. You Sir seem to be more hurt and disappointed with the BJP than you are motivated and excited for the Congress.

I dont propose to make a case for the BJP in this letter but I find this suggestion by you even more curious

longevity of the Congress is a sign that there is something about it that is worth salvaging

If memory serves me right, the only occassion when this nation saw you take a public stance on principle and convictions was when you resigned from the National Knowledge Commission on the issue of OBC Reservations in Institutions of Higher Education.

The practice of Reservations in India is about as long as the post Independence Congress Party. So should we take it that your objections to OBC Reservations are at odds with this notion that longevity is somehow the yardstick for the worthiness of an idea.

If one were to extend the same longevity yardstick to just about every social ill from Dowry to Caste based identity politics that continue to survive in India, does their long life make them ideas worth salvaging ?

I dont want to even go into your selective defense of election time rhetoric from Sonia Gandhi, its less than honest and you know it. It would have been ok if you were transparent about your partisanship for one would have taken it as all is fair in war and elections.

But then Sir you purport to give intellectual cover to Sonia Gandhi’s partisanship while being less than forthright about it.

In doing so you Sir have diminished your standing as a Public Intellectual.

I am not troubled by your dismissal of the BJP’s next tier of leadership. But I am extremely troubled by your seeking hope in the next generation of the Congress’ leadership based on its age while leaving unstated your implicit endorsement of Rahul Gandhi as successor to Manmohan Singh.

It stumps me what idea and ideal you hope to salvage by taking comfort in the prospect that the heir apparent’s only claim to the top office are his last name and genes, is younger than his political rivals.

In closing let me just say that the danger to India is not from its illiterate masses in remote villages who may choose the BJP  out of their own wisdom of lack of. 

But the real danger Sir is from public intellectuals in New Delhi who lack the courage and conviction to be forthright in their partisanship and from those who seek to provide intellectual cover to sycophancy and subversion of the original intent of the Constitution.

Yours Sincerely

An Aam Admi who admires your occassional intellectual brilliance but is deeply disappointed with your lack of conviction.

Filed under: Chattisgarh Polls 2008, Chhattisgarh Polls 2008, Delhi Polls 2008, Dharmayudh-2009, Gujarat Polls 2007, India Elections 2009, India Lok Sabha Elections 2009, Karnataka Polls 2008, Lok Sabha Polls 2008-2009, Madhya Pradesh Polls 2008, Madhya Pradesh Polls 2008, Manmohan Confidence Vote, Pratibha Patil, Rajasthan Polls 2008, betrayal of aam admi, jeetega-bharat

Open Letter to Dr. Pratap Bhanu Mehta

Eminent Delhi based public intellectual and former member of the National Knowledge Commission Dr. Pratap Bhanu Mehta today wrote a curious op-ed in the Indian Express titled “The Politics of Hurt“.

This open letter is addressed to him with the intention of obtaining some answers from him.

Dear Dr. Mehta

It was interesting to note that public intellectuals such as yourself can take a political stance in public 48 hours before the nation goes to polls.

But then your political stance reflected in this op-ed in the Indian Express is curious for a couple of reasons.

It is clear that you definitely dont want to vote for the BJP. It is also clear that you definitely do want to vote for the Congress.

But then Sir where you are emphatic in your rejection of the BJP you betray no conviction at all in your endorsement of the Congress. In fact you dont even hazard to say in as many words that you support the Congress despite betraying your sentiments towards it.

Why Sir this intellectual timidity ?

Why Sir do you need to dedicate 95% of your column for the case against the BJP and leave only a few sentences to make a less than convincing case for the Congress ?

Why Sir do you need the BJP excuse to make your case for the Congress ?

In fact less troubling than your critique of the BJP is your curious case for the Congress.

What “idea” exactly Sir are you referring to when you say

They attack the Congress in the name of an idea of what the Congress should be.

Your hopes for the so called “ideal” the Congress represents would have carried far greater credibility and conviction if you had dedicated your column to describing that “ideal”, rather than dedicate the entire column to venting out your disgust towards the BJP and Mr. Advani.

In fact doing so you seem to betray emotions that suggest the exact opposite. You Sir seem to be more hurt and disappointed with the BJP than you are motivated and excited for the Congress.

I dont propose to make a case for the BJP in this letter but I find this suggestion by you even more curious

longevity of the Congress is a sign that there is something about it that is worth salvaging

If memory serves me right, the only occassion when this nation saw you take a public stance on principle and convictions was when you resigned from the National Knowledge Commission on the issue of OBC Reservations in Institutions of Higher Education.

The practice of Reservations in India is about as long as the post Independence Congress Party. So should we take it that your objections to OBC Reservations are at odds with this notion that longevity is somehow the yardstick for the worthiness of an idea.

If one were to extend the same longevity yardstick to just about every social ill from Dowry to Caste based identity politics that continue to survive in India, does their long life make them ideas worth salvaging ?

I dont want to even go into your selective defense of election time rhetoric from Sonia Gandhi, its less than honest and you know it. It would have been ok if you were transparent about your partisanship for one would have taken it as all is fair in war and elections.

But then Sir you purport to give intellectual cover to Sonia Gandhi’s partisanship while being less than forthright about it.

In doing so you Sir have diminished your standing as a Public Intellectual.

I am not troubled by your dismissal of the BJP’s next tier of leadership. But I am extremely troubled by your seeking hope in the next generation of the Congress’ leadership based on its age while leaving unstated your implicit endorsement of Rahul Gandhi as successor to Manmohan Singh.

It stumps me what idea and ideal you hope to salvage by taking comfort in the prospect that the heir apparent’s only claim to the top office are his last name and genes, is younger than his political rivals.

In closing let me just say that the danger to India is not from its illiterate masses in remote villages who may choose the BJP  out of their own wisdom of lack of. 

But the real danger Sir is from public intellectuals in New Delhi who lack the courage and conviction to be forthright in their partisanship and from those who seek to provide intellectual cover to sycophancy and subversion of the original intent of the Constitution.

Yours Sincerely

An Aam Admi who admires your occassional intellectual brilliance but is deeply disappointed with your lack of conviction.

Filed under: Chattisgarh Polls 2008, Chhattisgarh Polls 2008, Delhi Polls 2008, Dharmayudh-2009, Gujarat Polls 2007, India Elections 2009, Karnataka Polls 2008, Lok Sabha Polls 2008-2009, Madhya Pradesh Polls 2008, Manmohan Confidence Vote, Offstumped, Pratibha Patil, Rajasthan Polls 2008, betrayal of aam admi, jeetega-bharat

India Elections 2009 – Manmohan Singh must release medical records

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who will go down in history for reducing himself to an electile dysfunctional surrogate of the mother and son duo of Sonia and Rahul Gandhi, today had this to claim on his health:

I have got a clean bill of good health from my doctors. I just had a meeting with them a few minutes ago and there is no need to worry,” Singh told reporters here when asked if his health would affect his functioning as Prime Minister, in case the UPA is voted to power.

A team of five doctors from the Asian Heart Institute in suburban Bandra Kurla, who had performed the surgery, conducted the over-half-an-hour check up on the Prime Minister and his condition was found to be stable, sources said.

It is interesting that Dr. Manmohan Singh should claim a clean bill of good health to bolster his ability to function as Prime Minister while at the same time making his ill health an excuse to not contest the Lok Sabha elections.

This duplicity on the part of Dr. Manmohan Singh lends credence to Priyanka Gandhi’s remarks on Rahul Gandhi succeeding Manmohan Singh as Prime Minister.

It is imperative to remember that Sonia Gandhi despite making up her mind on mind on Manmohan Singh being her party’s Prime Ministerial candidate never bothered to go public with it in the 2004 elections.

We are perhaps witnessing a repeat of the same sleight of hand by the Congress on the aam admi, with a reluctant to contest Nightwatchman in Manmohan Singh preparing the ground for Rahul Gandhi without actually saying so in the election campaign.

In the interest of transparency and honesty it is imperative that Dr. Manmohan Singh should release his medical records so the public at large can make an independent assessment of his claims of fitness to perform as Prime Minister while making excuses on health grounds to avoid contesting Lok Sabha elections.

Filed under: Chattisgarh Polls 2008, Chhattisgarh Polls 2008, Delhi Polls 2008, DesiPundit, Dharmayudh-2009, Gujarat Polls 2007, India Elections 2009, India Lok Sabha Elections 2009, Karnataka Polls 2008, Lok Sabha Polls 2008-2009, Madhya Pradesh Polls 2008, Madhya Pradesh Polls 2008, Manmohan Confidence Vote, Offstumped, Offstumped on Twitter, Rajasthan Polls 2008, betrayal of aam admi

Leadership in Crisis Management

Much has been written and said of the Mosque that was torn down and the terrorists that were flown. Very little is said though of the Mosque that was burnt and the Terrorists that were promised safe passage.

Two Ministers were deputed by the then Prime Minister to manage the crisis in the aftermath of the mosque burning after offers of safe passage failed. One of the Ministers is dead but the other is very much alive and is seeking to stake his claim to the Leadership of this nation.

One has to really scrounge the dark alleys of the internet to reconstruct the events leading up to and following the May 1995 burning of Charar-e-Sharief in Kashmir by Pakistan sponsored Terrorists.

Former J&K Governor and an ex- BJP MP  Jagmohan wrote this piece recently in September of 2008 in the Asian Age recounting the Charar-e-Sharief incident.

The fatal flaws of the Indian State and its leadership are reflected vividly in the events, from December 1994 to May 1995, pertaining to the famous shrine Charar-e-Sharief, built in 1808-10 in honour of Sheikh Nuruddin who founded the Sufi-Rishi order.

 About 50 hard-core militants, led by an Afghan mercenary, Mast Gul, sneaked into the dargah. The state and Central intelligence agencies remained ignorant or casual about their presence. The militants dug in and collected a large number of lethal weapons inside the complex.

It was only on March 5, 1995, when they killed two BSF jawans, that the seriousness of the situation dawned upon the authorities.

On March 8, the Army moved in to lay a sort of siege from a distance of about two kilometres.

Characteristically, the government was quick to announce “safe passage” to the militants.

But the offer was spurned by Mast Gul. Both, at the state and Central level, indecision and confusion continued while militants called the shots. Eventually, on May 11, 1995, the dargah and the adjoining houses and shopping complex were burnt down.

Physically, Charar-e-Sharief shrine was burnt by pro-Pakistani elements. But, on a different plane, it was burnt by the timidity and hesitancy of the Indian government. Pakistan and its terrorist outfits committed the “crime” by commission.  The Indian government committed it by omission.

After Charar-e-Sharief, Prime Minister Narasimha Rao’s statement in Parliament on May 12, 1995, that burning down of the shrine by mercenaries and militants was only going to steel our determination, sounded pathetic.

Could there be a worse demonstration of ineptness and lack of will? The monumental mishandling resulted in total destruction of the historic shrine, burning of 800 houses and 200 shops, besides costing millions of rupees to the country’s exchequer and causing grave human misery and pain not only to the residents of Charar-e-Sharief but also to thousands of others who became victims of the fallout.

What is still more deplorable is that Mast Gul, the most wanted foreign mercenary, escaped and even held press conferences and TV interviews on Indian soil.

 Overnight, he became a cult figure, providing a further prop to subversion and terrorism in Kashmir.

For this incident, which made India a laughing stock of the world, no one was held accountable.

The Prime Minister who mismanaged the crisis and the Home Minister who bungled are both dead.

But there was a third Minister who was also charged with managing the Charar-e-Sharief crisis but hardly anything is written of his contribution to this bungling nor have any questions of accountability been thrown at him.

To learn about then Finance Minister Manmohan Singh’s role in the Charar-e-Sharief crisis management, one has to turn to the New York Times writing on May 15th 1995.

The Indian Government sent two of its most powerful Cabinet ministers to Kashmir today to assess the turmoil raging there in the aftermath of the destruction by fire of the disputed region’s most revered Muslim shrine.

The two Cabinet ministers who went to Srinagar, the summer capital of Indian-ruled Kashmir, Shankarrao B. Chavan of the Home Ministry and Manmohan Singh of the Finance Ministry, arrived as army and police units tightened a 24-hour curfew across the state that has failed to prevent scores of clashes with protester

Exactly ten days after the Manmohan Singh crisis missive to Kashmir, Mast Gul, the chief accused in the burning down of Charar-e-Sharief who was offered “safe passage” by the then Congress Government, held a press conference on May 26th 1995 where he was rewarded for his heroic deed.

As the Congress seeks to make this election about contribution to Mosques that were not to be and about capitulation to Terrorists in the decade gone by, tough questions must be asked of Dr. Manmohan Singh of his role as a Leader in Crisis Management when Charar-e-Sharief burned

#1 Will he take responsibility for the Cabinet Decision to offer safe passage to foreign terrorists holed up in Mosques in Indian soil ?

#2 Will he take responsibility for the incompetence of his Government that allowed foreign terrorists to hold press conferences on Indian soil ?

#3 Will he explain to the nation exactly what was his contribution in the management of this crisis and its aftermath ?

#4 Will he hold himself accountable in retrospect by way of collective cabinet responsibility for the delinquency of the then Congress Government in allowing Foreign Terrorists to occuppy a Mosque on Indian Soil for 6 whole months with no fear of consequences ?

Postscript: Charar-e-Sharief shrine was rebuilt fully by October 2000.

To post comments click here

Filed under: Chattisgarh Polls 2008, Chhattisgarh Polls 2008, Delhi Polls 2008, DesiPundit, Dharmayudh-2009, Gujarat Polls 2007, India Elections 2009, Karnataka Polls 2008, Lok Sabha Polls 2008-2009, Madhya Pradesh Polls 2008, Manmohan Confidence Vote, Rajasthan Polls 2008, War on Mumbai, War on Terror, amarnath controversy, betrayal of aam admi, jeetega-bharat

Founding Fathers – Elect Prime Minister by Direct Adult Suffrage

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh gave us a lame excuse on Tuesday for his not contesting the Lok Sabha election.

His hypocrisy apart, this stance of his is a direct repudiation of the Founding Father’s original intent in the Constitution, evidence of which can be found in multiple instances within the Constituent Assembly Debates.

The most direct reference to this question is posed by Professor Shibban lal Saxena on 31st December 1948 when the Constituent Assembly debated Article 62 of the Draft Constitution.

I do feel that unless everybody who is a Minister has got the confidence of the electorate, he should not be appointed as one.

Every Minister who is a memberof a Cabinet must seek open election and if he is returned,only then he should be appointed a Minister

Probably, this was the purpose of my honourable Friend Dr.Ambedkar and what he meant was that if a Minister does not become a member of either House within six months, he ceasesto be a Minister. By this, he surely meant that he should beelected and I would very much welcome it from him if that is his purpose

In response Ambedkar speaking on the same day makes this point about “Ministers”

it is perfectlypossible to imagine that a person who is otherwise competent to hold the post of a Minister has been defeated in aconstituency for some reason which, although it may beperfectly good, might have annoyed the constituency and he might have incurred the displeasure of that particularconstituency.

It is not a reason why a member so competent as that should be not permitted to be appointed a member of the Cabinet on the assumption that he shall be able to get himself elected either from the same constituency or fromanother constituency.

After all the privilege that is permitted is a privilege that extends only for six months.It does not confer a right to that individual to sit in the House without being elected at all.

It is important to note however that the Indian Constitution makes a clear and unambiguous distinction between a “Minister” and the “Prime Minister”.

Ambedkar in fact had clarified this in the context of the same issue on the very previous day, 30th December 1948.

I do not understand why it is undemocratic to permit a Prime Minister, who is chosen by the people, to appoint Ministers from a House which is also chosen on adult suffrage, or by people who are chosen on the basis of adult suffrage, or by people who are chosen on thebasis of adult suffrage. I fail to understand why that system is undemocratic.

Not only is Ambedkar very clear on the original intent of the Founding Fathers that the Prime Minister must be someone who has been elected by the people, Ambedkar is also clear that “Direct Adult Suffrage” is the method by which such a Prime Minister can claim legitimacy as opposed to other “Ministers” who could be chosen by directly or indirectly.

The most unambiguous validation of this original intent comes a year later on 18th November 1949 when the Constituent Assembly was in its final phases of passing the Motion on the Draft that was to become the Constitution of India.

Gokulram Daulatram Bhatt had this to say on the method of electing the Prime Minister and President.

At one time however we had said that our President would be elected on the basis of adult franchise and we had as a matter of fact accepted in principle that proposal.

But later on we began to feel that this is not possible because on the one side Prime Minister would be elected by means of adult franchise while on the other the President would also be so elected and if any difference of opinion occurred in these two officials who had been elected by the same body of people it would be difficult to overcome those differences.

Therefore, we felt that reality and practical considerations demanded that we should give up our insistence on the direct election of the President and agreed for his being elected in some other way.

We agree to this because we felt that our representatives at the Centre and in the Provinces would be elected on the basis of adult franchise.

This should leave no one in doubt that the Founding Fathers who drafted the Indian Constitution intended the Prime Minister to have derived his legitimacy by being directly elected by the people through Adult Suffrage.

That the Founding Fathers did not choose to make this explicit in the text of the Constitution was simply because to them it was inconceivable that a perversity would be perpetrated on the Constitution where a Prime Minister would enjoy office for his entire 5 year term without getting elected directly by the people.

It is futile to expect someone like Congress President Sonia Gandhi who has never demonstrated any great understanding of the Constitution to show moral and intellectual leadership on this issue

But Dr. Manmohan Singh cannot be let off the hook on this one.

If he has any faith or conviction in the original intent of the Constitution as manifested in the remarks by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and others, he must explain why he did not contest the Lok Sabha elections for the last 5 years and why he has no intention of doing so in 2009.

To discuss this post your comments here.

Filed under: Chattisgarh Polls 2008, Chhattisgarh Polls 2008, Constituent Assembly, Delhi Polls 2008, DesiPundit, Dharmayudh-2009, Gujarat Polls 2007, India Elections 2009, Karnataka Polls 2008, Lok Sabha Polls 2008-2009, Madhya Pradesh Polls 2008, Manmohan Confidence Vote, Rajasthan Polls 2008, betrayal of aam admi, jeetega-bharat